Twilight Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Download the Twilight Strategy e-book!

Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine  (Read 1058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pietshaq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Wargameroom username: WojciechPietrzak_TS
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
    • My Twilight Struggle blog
Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine
« on: December 08, 2015, 07:16:48 am »
0

Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine* (4Ops, Mid War, neutral)

If DEFCON drops to 1 during the current turn, both players roll a die. Each player adds +1 for each region he dominates or controls and +1 for each Military Operation. The Phasing Player subtracts 2,5 from his result. The higher result wins the game.
Logged
If you find my contribution useful, please donate some Bitcoins: 1LTicKy5ww4tAQwLqRDHxbpKHBQ9QvcK72
My Twilight Struggle blog

MichaelVal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2015, 11:34:55 am »
0

Interesting.  It would seem to strongly discourage play of Missile Envy.  As the USA can more safely play ME on the headline, this would favor the Soviets.  It would also strongly encourage couping early and often in the turn until one had 5 mil ops.  The USSR usually wants to coup on AR1 anyways so no change in strategy there.  The USA often wants to place influence on AR1.  Now, as the USA, I'd almost be forced to immediately coup some non-battleground just so a play of MADD doesn't get a +3 or +4 drm.  I can also see USA AR7 plays to break Soviet battlegrounds becoming much more important.  Overall, I think this card would bring a significant change in play and strongly favor the Soviets.
Logged

KiG

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
Re: Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2015, 05:15:27 pm »
0

Though instead of "wins the game" I would prefer "loses less".   :-\
Logged

pietshaq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Wargameroom username: WojciechPietrzak_TS
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
    • My Twilight Struggle blog
Re: Mutual Assured Destruction Doctrine
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2015, 05:55:03 am »
0

Though instead of "wins the game" I would prefer "loses less".   :-\

How about "loses as if he had drawn"? ;)
Logged
If you find my contribution useful, please donate some Bitcoins: 1LTicKy5ww4tAQwLqRDHxbpKHBQ9QvcK72
My Twilight Struggle blog
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 21 queries.